Free Case Transferred In - District Transfer - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:05-cv-00895-JJF Document 13-7 Case 3:05-cv-02831-MHP Document 5-1

Filed 07/29/2005 Filed 01/17/2006

Page 1 of 3 Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Bingham McCutchen LLP DAVID M. BALABANIAN (SBN 37368) CHRISTOPHER B. HOCKETT (SBN 121539) JOY K. FUYUNO (SBN 193890) Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111-4067 Telephone: (415) 393-2000 Facsimile: (415) 393-2286 Attorneys for Defendant Intel Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

MAJOR LEAGUE SOFTBALL, INC., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. INTEL CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Defendant.

No. C-05-2831-MHP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE FILING DATE FOR DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

IT IS STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES, THROUGH THEIR COUNSEL AS FOLLOWS: Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiffs Major League Softball, Inc. and Defendant Intel Corporation hereby stipulate that Intel Corporation's response to Plaintiffs' complaint shall be due either 60 days after transfer of the above captioned case pursuant to any motion to coordinate or consolidate pre-trial proceedings per 28 U.S.C. Section 1407 or, in the alternative, 45 days after any such motion has been denied. The parties request this transfer because the plaintiffs in Brauch, et al. v. Intel Corp., No. C 05-2743 (BZ) (N.D. Cal., filed July

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE RESPONSE DATE
SF/21627618.1

Case 1:05-cv-00895-JJF Document 13-7 Case 3:05-cv-02831-MHP Document 5-1

Filed 07/29/2005 Filed 01/17/2006

Page 2 of 3 Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

5, 2005), a related matter, have filed a petition to coordinate or consolidate pre-trial proceedings per 28 U.S.C. Section 1407, and the above-styled action has been identified as a related action to that petition. As a result, the outcome of the pending petition will impact significantly the schedule of this case. This is the first stipulation between the parties. Because this litigation has just begun, granting such a stipulation will not have any negative impact on the schedule of this case. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED. DATED: July __, 2005 Bingham McCutchen LLP

By: JOY K. FUYUNO Attorneys for Defendant Intel Corporation

Saveri & Saveri, Inc.

By: R. ALEXANDER SAVERI Attorneys for Plaintiffs Major League Softball, Inc.

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE RESPONSE DATE
SF/21627618.1

Case 1:05-cv-00895-JJF Document 13-7 Case 3:05-cv-02831-MHP Document 5-1

Filed 07/29/2005 Filed 01/17/2006

Page 3 of 3 Page 3 of 3

1 [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE DATE 2 3 4 5 6 7 Dated: ____________, 2005 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE RESPONSE DATE
SF/21627618.1

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Intel Corporation's response to Plaintiffs' complaint shall be due either 60 days after transfer of the above captioned case pursuant to any motion to coordinate or consolidate pre-trial proceedings per 28 U.S.C. Section 1407, or, in the alternative, 45 days after any such motion has been denied. PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

________________________ Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel United States District Judge